Lightweight DSLR - so who can help me please... ?

Azure

Azure

Messages
932
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello Folks

So, I'm here for some more advice if you'd be so kind, as I can't go out for a while, and would rather have your input before I do go and try them out.

Which DSLR do you consider to be the most lightweight - yet brilliant? :D

I've been reading that the Nikon D60 is a pretty darn good camera and also one of the more lightweight ones around.

At present I have the Sony A200 and a big mama lens 75-300mm - but I'm finding this incredibly heavy having used it a great deal over the last few days and over the last couple years. I take my camera everywhere.

All and any advice would be most welcome :)

My interest is in macro so I realise whichever camera I use would require another lens which would increase the weight.

Thank you for your time and thoughts!
 
The DSLR itself is not all of the equation, especially if using longer lenses. I have a 100-400L and whether I use my 7D or 550D makes very little noticible difference as the lens itself is so heavy. If anything the heavier 7D is better as it balances out the lens.
 
Hey there Dave - yep, I had read a review about that one as it is one DSLR that has a live view, which for me would be rather handy.

I struggle as, unlike most probably, I don't ever take just a few photos - I take a few hundred at a time and looking thru a viewfinder is problematic at times, trying to keep my left eye closed.

Ha - I have photo lines on my face!!!!!!!!!!!!

How long have you used your Olympus and how is it for macro?

Thank you.
 
SeagullSteve said:
The DSLR itself is not all of the equation, especially if using longer lenses. I have a 100-400L and whether I use my 7D or 550D makes very little noticible difference as the lens itself is so heavy. If anything the heavier 7D is better as it balances out the lens.
Click to expand...

Hi Steve - the macro lens I have been advised about is the tamron 105 and a sigma - and a kind gentleman is going to let me have a play with his lens in the new year sometime. I also read up about the 100-400 lens which would help me with my bird shots as I am at a distance from them... but my main area of interest is bug eyes and hairy bug legs, close up flower and abstract... plus I'm addicted to water droplets now (thanks Ashmash)

I don't think I've ever held a canon before and I will get to a store and try these out - I have small cacky hands so these big cameras are a struggle after a few hours of shooting.

I never realised just how many cameras were out there - I've been using mine for a couple years but am ready to upgrade now and the macro lens is real important.

Merry Christmas to you, and thanks.
 
Hiya!

I've had my 510 nearly two years now and I think its great.

I have extension tubes, reversing rings etc, but to be honest macro isn't my thing and I'm just as happy with a 4x magnifying filter in front of my lens.

You need to get to somewhere that sells Olympus and try holding one, does it feel comfortable? Can you get to the controls?

On top of that the kit lenses are better than many of the competitions' kit lenses.

Each to their own, but make your own decisions, all modern cams of 10mp are pretty good!
 
if it has to have a mirror then yes, Olympus E 4x and E6x are your bets bet.

If you can live with aelectronic viewfinder (or no viewfinder) and a much more basic array of lenses, have a look at a Panasonic GH1 or GH2. Very light indeed.

GH1 + 14-45mm lens, hood, strap, fresh battery, SD card and a heavy metal tripod mount weighs in at 728g.
 
I have to be very careful with weight due to my disability and so really looked into things carefully before buying.

The choice was between the olympus mentioned and the canon 500D.

The canon is just a few grams heavier, weighing in at just 510 grams with battery and card fitted.

The main reasons I went for the canon where:

Larger APSC sensor as opposed to the smaller 4/3rds
More features.
Proven pedigree
Better range and choice of lenses, cheaper price of lenses, availability of reasonably priced fast (F2.8 or faster) lenses, better range of third party lenses.
More choice of accessories such as flash guns etc
Better resale value.

I also tried the M43 camera's ie panasonic G1 before buying the canon, but even using the faster Leica lens I found the low light performance appalling and overall the IQ of the canon blows it out of the water.

If your careful about the weight of lenses as well then things never become an issue.
I can understand people saying about the balance with a lens etc, but that doesn't change the fact that if its to heavy for you to comfortably hold, and hold steady then its no damn good to you.

Sadly for me this has ruled out several camera's, including Nikons/Pentax as both are much heavier.It's also ruled out upgrading to a 5Dii as again its to heavy.
It also ruled out sigma lenses as in general they are heavier than their canon or tamron counter parts, as well as F2.8 long zooms (ie 70-200 etc).
Same goes with grips, handy, but makes the camera too heavy for me.

I currently use the kit in my camera bag list, none of it gives me any issues weight wise.
 
Last edited:
Yep, thank you for that info.

Weight is a problem for my hands too.

Hoping to be able to go out soon and try some new lenses ... mebbe a new camera entirely

all very helpful info - thank y'all. :)
 
Your A200 is 532g. The a230 which is its replacement in the Sony range is 412g, that's the lightest camera they sell and is tiny for a DSLR.

You didn't say the make of your zoom, but the Sony 75-300 is 460g so with the a200 that's a combined weight of 992g, with the a230 it would be 872g, or only a 12% saving. The 70-400 is 1.5kg on its own if you are looking at a zoom with a greater reach, if you struggle with the a200 + 75-300 you are really going to have problems with a bigger lens.

For macro Sony do a 30mm/2.8 which only weighs 150g, but you would need to get quite close to your subjects with that focal length.
 
Hey Mark - wow - thanks for that info - yep, it is the Sony 75-300... carrying around nearly a K of weight, the amount that I do, is quite hard work when you have duff hands to start off with - and you're absolutely right - I wouldn't cope with the 70-400 (tho that does sound a rather good lens <sigh> )

The 30mm macro sounds excellent - but possibly most of my subjects would have flown or crawled away if I got that close ...

gosh, decisions decisions - I so need to get to somewhere I can try these out.

The other prerequisite that's a must would be a stabilisation feature and from what I've been reading, there are a LOT of top notch cameras that don't have this :eek: I was thinking most cameras had this now, but apparently not.

I'm still thinking that the remote control thingy seems a good idea as if I was setting up a tripod shot I wouldn't have to hold the shutter for any length of time - and I'm intending of doing more land and sea scapes.

Normally tho, must of my subjects will be 'moving' or about to 'fly' so I need something a little lighter that's extremely versatile.

I'm also thinking I may need to increase my budget a tad to get what I wish for :D

Thanks for the guidance and info - much appreciated Mark.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top